"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
news:v6Qmc.38494$IG1.2156146@attbi_s04...
Are you aware of any documented instances of FAA sanctions against a
rental
pilot for failing to review logbooks, or any written FDSO interpretation
on
the question?

http://www.aopa.org/members/files/pi...00/pc0009.html

Summary: the pilot, even a renter, is the final authority responsible for
ensuring airworthiness. The article, the September 2000 "Pilot Counsel"
column describes an FAA enforcement case where a renter was found at fault
for flying an unairworthy airplane, the annual inspection having been
expired at the time of the flight.

That said, things can break after the logbooks and airplane have been
inspected. Roger's statement regarding "These are not rental cars. Your
responsibility goes far beyond what 99% of rental pilots live up to" is only
true inasumuch as it applies to safety. And frankly, any motorist who does
not perform at least a cursory inspection of a rental car is just as
culpable for any mechanical difficulty that causes an accident as a renter
pilot would be for an airplane that wasn't airworthy.

None of that changes the fact that the *owner* of the airplane is the one
responsible for the costs related to maintenance and repairs. Yes, the
renter is obligated to ensure that the airplane is safe to fly. No, the
renter is NOT obligated to pay for repairs, or even any additional costs
over and above their normal rental costs that are related to maintenance
failures that happen away from the airplane's home base. Not even the cost
of the flight home, no more than the renter of a car would be responsible
for the transport of that car should it break down while in the care of that
renter.

Any pilot who willingly agrees to enter into an agreement that does obligate
them to be responsible had better have a darn good reason for doing so (as
someone else mentioned, maybe the quality or nature of the aircraft is so
great as to justify taking on that responsibility). Otherwise, they are a
fool.

Pete